Two-port needlescopic cholecystectomy: prospective study of 100 cases.

OBJECTIVE: To test the feasibility of needlescopic cholecystectomy using a two-port technique with 3-mm miniaturised instruments. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Regional hospital, Hong Kong. PATIENTS: One hundred consecutive patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy from September 2001 to August 2002. INTERVENTION: Two-port needlescopic cholecystectomy all performed or supervised by a single laparoscopic surgeon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Conversion of the procedure, the operating time, postoperative analgesic requirement, pain score using the 10-cm visual analog scale, complications, and the postoperative stay. To determine the technical difficulty of this new technique, the data from the first 50 patients were compared with those of the latter 50. Outcome variables were also compared with a group of 58 patients operated on with the standard two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a previous randomised trial. RESULTS: One conversion to open cholecystectomy was reported. Three patients required the enlargement of epigastric port to a size of 5 mm and six patients required an additional port to complete the operation. The median operating time was 62 minutes (range, 33-168 minutes). The median pain score was 3.5 (range, 0-9) and the median postoperative stay was 2 days (range, 1-14 days). Six patients had postoperative complications. When the first 50 patients were compared with the latter 50, there were no differences in the conversion rate, operating time, complication rate, and duration of hospital stay. However, the latter 50 patients had significantly lower pain scores (median, 3.5 vs 4.9; P=0.007) and faster resumption of diet (median, 5 vs 9 hours; P<0.001). The median operating time of needlescopic cholecystectomy was notably longer (62 vs 46 minutes; P<0.001) compared with that of the two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients undergoing needlescopic cholecystectomy had a better resumption of diet (median, 5 vs 7 hours; P<0.001) and less postoperative pain (overall pain score, median, 3.5 vs 4.8; P=0.052) than the two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. Pain scores at individual port sites were also lower in needlescopic cholecystectomy group (umbilical port: median, 3 vs 4.4, P=0.015; epigastric port: median, 2.0 vs 3.6, P=0.036). CONCLUSION: Two-port needlescopic cholecystectomy is technically feasible and may further improve the surgical outcomes in terms of postoperative pain and cosmesis. It can be considered for routine practice by surgeons who are familiar with the two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy technique.

Percutaneous cholecystostomy for the treatment of acute cholecystitis in the critically ill and elderly.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and outcomes of percutaneous cholecystostomy as an alternative treatment option for elderly and critically ill patients who have acute cholecystitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of patients who underwent emergency percutaneous cholecystostomy at the North District Hospital, Hong Kong from September 1999 to July 2002 were reviewed. Indications for the procedure, patient demographics, and other clinical details were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients (10 male, 15 female) with a median age of 81 years (range, 39-97 years) presented with acute cholecystitis and underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy with ultrasound guidance. Two patients required emergency cholecystectomy on day 1 after the procedures because of deteriorating conditions. The rest of the patients clinically improved after drainage. There was no major periprocedural complication, and four patients had their catheter accidentally dislodged but did not require re-insertion. There were five in-patient mortalities, although the majority of these deaths were from unrelated illness. Subsequently, only six patients underwent elective cholecystectomy, one open and five laparoscopic. Two patients were offered percutaneous endoscopic cholecystolithotripsy, one defaulted and the other could not tolerate the procedure. Eleven patients declined further intervention due to the high surgical risks, three of these patients developed biliary symptoms, one had acute cholecystitis, and the other two had cholangitis. The rest of patients had no symptoms related to the gallstones. The median follow-up period was 81 weeks (range, 27-162 weeks). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous cholecystostomy is a viable treatment option for elderly and critically ill patients presenting with acute cholecystitis. It has a high success rate with minimal procedure-related complications. Elective cholecystostomy is the treatment of choice for low-risk patients after the initial acute cholecystitis.

Diagnosis of small bowel radiation enteritis by capsule endoscopy.

We report a case of radiation-induced enteritis of the small bowel diagnosed by capsule endoscopy. A 67-year-old woman, who had received radiotherapy for a carcinoma of cervix 10 years ago, presented with passage of tarry stool and anaemia. The gastroscopy results were normal and the small bowel enema showed no abnormalities, but colonoscopy revealed altered blood clots in the right-sided colon and in the terminal ileum. M2A capsule endoscopy was subsequently performed that showed an ulcer and stricture at the distal ileum. The capsule, however, became lodged at this stricture site caused by the stenosis. A small bowel resection was performed to remove both the diseased section and the capsule, and the patient made an uneventful recovery.

Short-term and long-term results of endoscopic balloon dilation for achalasia: 12 years' experience.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: This retrospective study reports 12 years' experience with pneumatic dilation treatment in patients with achalasia and attempts to define factors capable of predicting failure of endoscopic dilation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with achalasia who received endoscopic balloon dilation were studied retrospectively. Repeat dilation was carried out if dysphagia persisted or recurred. A structured symptom score questionnaire (the Eckardt score) was conducted by phone with patients who had received dilation and had been followed up for more than 2 years. Failure was defined as the presence of significant dysphagic symptoms after more than two repeat dilations. Data for the first 2 years (short-term) and for the subsequent follow-up (long-term) were analyzed. RESULTS: From 1989 to 2001, 66 patients underwent endoscopic balloon dilation for achalasia; three perforations (4.5 %) occurred, with no mortalities. Dysphagic symptoms significantly improved 12 weeks after the procedure ( P < 0.05). Fourteen patients (20 %) required a second dilation procedure within a median of 7 months (range 1 - 52 months), and 13 of them underwent repeat dilations within the first 2 years. Five patients (7.5 %) required further surgical or endoscopic therapy. Fifty-eight patients received pneumatic dilation for more than 2 years; 32 (55 %) responded to the questionnaire. The mean dysphagia score was 1.7 (SD 1.2), with only five patients (16 %) having significant dysphagic symptoms during a median follow-up period of 55 months (range 26 - 130 months). The cumulative success rates for pneumatic dilation after 5 and 19 years were 74 % and 62 %, respectively. Cox regression analysis identified small balloon size (30 mm) as the only significant factor capable of predicting failure of endoscopic dilation ( P = 0.009; relative risk 5.3; 95 % confidence interval, 1.7 to 40.9). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic balloon dilation is an effective treatment for achalasia, with minimal morbidity (60 % experience long-term benefit).

The safety, feasibility, and acceptability of patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy: prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, feasibility, and acceptability of patient-controlled sedation for elective day-case colonoscopy, and the factors predicting patients' unwillingness to use patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy. DESIGN: Prospective, non-randomised study. SETTING: University-affiliated endoscopy centre, Hong Kong. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred patients who underwent elective day-case colonoscopy were prospectively recruited from January 2001 to June 2002. INTERVENTION: Sedation for colonoscopy was a mixture of propofol and alfentanil, which was delivered by means of a patient-controlled syringe pump. Each bolus delivered 4.8 mg propofol and 12 microg alfentanil. No loading dose was used and the lockout time was set at zero. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cardiopulmonary complications, dose of patient-controlled sedation used, recovery time, satisfaction score, delayed side-effects, and the willingness to use the same sedation protocol for future colonoscopy. A multiple stepwise logistic regression model was used to assess which factors might predict unwillingness to use patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy. RESULTS: The mean (standard deviation) age of patients was 53.0 (13.9) years. The mean dose of propofol consumed was 0.93 (0.69) mg/kg. Forty-three (8.6%) patients developed hypotension during the procedure. The mean satisfaction score was 7.2 (2.6). Sixteen (3.2%) patients developed delayed side-effects. The median (interquartile range) recovery time was 0 (0-5) minutes. Approximately 78% of patients were willing to use patient-controlled sedation for future colonoscopy if needed. Younger age (<50 years), female sex, a higher mean dose of sedatives used, a lower satisfaction score, and the presence of delayed side-effects were independent factors that were associated with patients' unwillingness to use patient-controlled sedation for colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: . The use of patient-controlled sedation for elective colonoscopy is safe, feasible, and acceptable to most patients.

Can visual distraction decrease the dose of patient-controlled sedation required during colonoscopy? A prospective randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: We previously demonstrated that audio distraction using relaxation music could lead to a decrease in the dose of sedative medication required and improve patient satisfaction during colonoscopy. This prospective randomized controlled trial was designed to test the hypotheses that visual distraction may also decrease the requirement for sedatives and that audio and visual distraction may have additive beneficial effects when used in combination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 165 consecutive patients who underwent elective colonoscopy were randomly allocated into three groups to receive different modes of sedation: group 1 received visual distraction and patient-controlled sedation (PCS); group 2 received audiovisual distraction and PCS; group 3 received PCS alone. A mixture of propofol and alfentanil, delivered by a Graseby 3300 PCA pump, was used for PCS in these groups. Each bolus of PCS delivered 4.8 mg propofol and 12 micro g alfentanil. Measured outcomes included the dose of PCS used, complications, recovery time, pain score, satisfaction score, and willingness to use the same mode of sedation if the procedure were to be repeated. RESULTS: Eight patients were excluded after randomization. The mean+/-SD dose of propofol used in group 2 (0.81 mg/kg +/- 0.49) was significantly less than the dose used in group 1 (1.17 mg/kg +/- 0.81) and that used in group 3 (1.18 mg/kg +/- 0.60) ( P < 0.01, one-way analysis of variance). The mean +/- SD pain score was also lower in group 2 (5.1 +/- 2.5), compared with the pain scores in group 1 (6.2 +/- 2.2) and group 3 (7.0 +/- 2.4) ( P < 0.01, one-way analysis of variance). The mean +/- SD satisfaction score was higher in groups 1 (8.2 +/- 2.4)) and 2 (8.4 +/- 2.4), compared with the score in group 3 (6.1 +/- 2.9) ( P < 0.01, one-way analysis of variance). A majority of patients in groups 1 (73 %) and 2 (85 %) said that they would be willing to use the same mode of sedation again, compared with only 53 % in group 3 ( P < 0.01, chi-squared test). CONCLUSIONS: Visual distraction alone did not decrease the dose of sedative medication required for colonoscopy. When audio distraction was added, both the dose of sedative medication required and the pain score decreased significantly. Both visual and audiovisual distraction might improve patients' acceptance of colonoscopy.

Subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery for venous ulcers.

We report the treatment and outcomes of 12 patients who underwent subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery for severe chronic venous insufficiency and venous ulceration. All patients had received prior superficial venous ablative surgery and presented with incompetent perforating veins in the calf and persistent venous ulceration (lasting >10 years). Outcome measures included ulcer healing time, recurrence, clinical symptom, and disability scores. There was one wound complication after subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery. The cumulative ulcer healing rate was 25% at 3 months, 42% at 6 months, and 92% at 1 year. One patient developed ulcer recurrence at 12 months after surgery. The mean clinical score and disability score decreased from 13.00 (standard deviation, 2.26) to 4.83 (1.47) and 1.75 (0.45) to 0.50 (0.52), respectively (P<0.001) after a median follow-up of 15.0 months (interquartile range, 12.0-21.5 months). Subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery was safe and effective in the treatment of patients with severe chronic venous insufficiency and venous ulceration caused by incompetent perforating veins in the calf.

Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been reported to be safe and feasible. However, whether it offers any additional advantages remains controversial. This study reports a randomized trial that compared the clinical outcomes of two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: One hundred and twenty consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to receive either the two-port or the four-port technique. All patients were blinded to the type of operation they underwent. Four surgical tapes were applied to standard four-port sites in both groups at the end of the operation. All dressings were kept intact until the first follow-up 1 week after surgery. Postoperative pain at the four sites was assessed on the first day after surgery using a 10-cm unscaled visual analog scale (VAS). Other outcome measures included analgesia requirements, length and difficulty of the operation, postoperative stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars. RESULTS: Demographic data were comparable for both groups. Patients in the two-port group had shorter mean operative time (54.6 +/- 24.7 min vs 66.9 +/- 33.1 min for the four-post group; p = 0.03) and less pain at individual subcostal port sites [mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 1.5 vs 2.8 ( p = 0.01) at the midsubcostal port site and 1.3 vs 2.3 ( p = 0.02) at the lateral subcostal port site]. Overall pain score, analgesia requirements, hospital stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy resulted in less individual port-site pain and similar clinical outcomes but fewer surgical scars compared to four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thus, it can be recommended as a routine procedure in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Minimal invasive approach of gastric and esophageal mobilization in total pharyngolaryngoesophagectomy: total laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic technique.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate early results in total pharyngolaryngoesophagectomy (PLE) by minimally invasive approaches for patients suffered from pharyngoesophageal tumor. METHODS: Between April 1998 and September 2001, 12 consecutive patients underwent either total laparoscopic (n = 9) or hand-assisted laparoscopic (n = 3) gastric mobilization plus transhiatal esophageal resection in total PLE. The operative data and postoperative outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Total PLE by minimally invasive approach was successfully performed in 11 patients, and 1 patient required conversion due to uncontrolled bleeding. The median total operative time was 8.5 h (range, 5-11 h) and the abdominal laparoscopic stage usually took less than 4 h. The median time for extubation was 2 days (range, 1-4 days) and the median ICU stay was 2 days (range, 1-20 days). There was no 30-day mortality, and major complications occurred in 5 patients (42%). CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive PLE is a feasible and safe alternative to conventional open surgery for patients with pharyngoesophageal carcinoma.

Through-the-scope stent for malignant gastric outlet obstruction.

This report is of the technique and results for through-the-scope stent in palliating malignant gastric outlet obstruction for 17 patients. All procedures were done using conscious sedation and fluoroscopy. Enteral Wallstents with a diameter of 20 mm or 22 mm and length 60 mm or 90 mm were used and delivered over a guidewire through an endoscope with an operating channel of at least 3.7 mm. A total of 18 stents were placed. One stent failed to be deployed. One stent migrated and required insertion of a second stent. One patient required repeat endoscopy to stop bleeding from the tumour. Through-the-scope stent relieved obstructive symptoms for 14 (82%) patients. The median dysphagia score improved from 4 to 2 after through-the-scope stent (P=0.001). The median overall survival and hospital-free survival time was 6 weeks (interquartile range, 3-9 weeks) and 4 weeks (interquartile range, 1-7 weeks), respectively. To conclude, through-the-scope stent was safe and feasible, offering an alternative minimal invasive method to palliate obstructive symptoms for patients with inoperable tumours causing gastric outlet obstruction.

The clinical efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in squamous esophageal cancer: a prospective nonrandomized study of pulse and continuous-infusion regimens with Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil as preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced squamous esophageal cancer and compared two different infusion regimens. The outcomes were also compared with those of our historical control patients treated by surgery alone. METHODS: From 1991 to 1997, 83 consecutive esophageal cancer patients underwent surgical exploration after completion of two cycles of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy regimens, either in pulse or in continuous infusion cycles. Outcomes were compared with those of 76 historical control patients. Both groups were comparable in demographic characteristics and tumor stages. The resection rates, operative morbidity, mortality, and survival rates were compared. RESULTS: Partial response was achieved in 50% of patients who received chemotherapy. There was no chemotherapy-related mortality. The resection, morbidity, and mortality rates and median survival between the surgery-alone group and the chemotherapy group were 71.1% vs. 82%, 51% vs. 55%, and 4% vs. 10.8%, 12.0 vs. 13.5 months, respectively (P >.05). There was also no statistically significant difference between the two regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil infusion, in pulse or continuous regimens, followed by surgery for squamous esophageal cancer patients had no added benefit in the overall survival.

Two liters of polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage solution versus sodium phosphate as bowel cleansing regimen for colonoscopy: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: As a bowel cleansing agent for colonoscopy, sodium phosphate (NaP) has been reported to have equal effectiveness and better patient tolerance in comparison with 4 l polyethylene glycol-electrolyte lavage (PEG-EL) solution. Poor patient tolerance is frequently associated with a large amount of fluid consumed, and better patient tolerance might therefore be expected if the volume of PEG-EL solution could be reduced. This study aimed to compare 2 l PEG-EL solution with NaP in relation to patients' tolerance and its effectiveness as a bowel cleansing agent. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred consecutive patients admitted to the day-procedure ward for elective colonoscopy were prospectively randomized to receive either a 2-l PEG-EL solution or a 90-ml oral NaP regimen. Patients with a history of congestive heart failure, impaired renal function (creatinine > 1.5 mg/dl), or previous colectomy were excluded from the study. The patients completed a questionnaire to assess their tolerance of bowel preparation before the colonoscopy. Endoscopists, who were blinded to the type of regimen that had been used, scored the adequacy of bowel preparation from the rectum to cecum using a defined endoscopic score. RESULTS: Two hundred patients were included in this randomized trial. Nine patients were excluded, due to either an incomplete questionnaire (two in the PEG-EL group, one in the NaP group) or inability to complete the bowel preparation regimen (four in the PEG-EL group and two in the NaP group). The demographic data were comparable in the two groups. There were no differences between the two groups with regard to willingness to repeat the regimen, ease of consumption, acceptability of the bowel preparation regimen, or the endoscopists' satisfaction with the quality of bowel preparation. The NaP group had a better mean endoscopic score at the cecum compared with the PEG-EL group (1.47 +/- 1.15 vs. 1.05 +/- 0.76; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness and patient tolerance of the 2-l PEG-EL solution is comparable with that of oral NaP. The 2-l PEG-EL solution is therefore an effective alternative as a bowel-cleansing agent for colonoscopy.